Quantcast
Locked: Are Sony's 1st Party Studios Leading The Way?

Forums - Sony Discussion - Are Sony's 1st Party Studios Leading The Way?

"no i'm not saying these games aren't quality, i'm just merely asking what makes them so much more quality than their predecessors.

and if you read up a couple posts where i quote two different people one explaining why God of War 3 is better than its predicessors and why Galaxy 2 is better than its predecessor is my main gripe."

I don't see what your gripe is. Could you explain it?



Around the Network

I think most would argue that Nintendo is the leader.  Whatever the case Nintendo is pulling in cash hand over fist.



Remember, magic is just stuff science has not made boring yet.

GOW3 introduced some fun fluid gameplay with an unpapralled sense of scale and direction (in art and story)...it was already a great franchise and GOW3 was no exception but it was a more complete experience than the previous two in every possible way...the game starts with a bang and doesn't stop the momentum till it ends

As for the graphics, hell yes. The only rival I can think is UC2 which is up to debate....games like Gow3 benefits from great graphics and detail...it helps create the perfect atmosphere for the game and Santa Monica did it brilliantly as well, one can say it was the icing on the cake if you will... :)



In-Kat-We-Trust Brigade!

"This world is Merciless, and it's also very beautiful"

For All News/Info related to the PlayStation Vita, Come and join us in the Official PSV Thread!

patapon said:

Wow, this thread went right off a cliff didn't it? I wish the author rewrote the article but instead took into consideration arbitrary terminology like 1st/2nd/3rd party.

We all know what the article is trying to say. And that whether or not something is 1st party doesn't matter. He's saying everything in regards to Sony games. Take Demon's Souls, that's a Sony game. Sony owns the IP and helped develop it into the glory it is today. It's undeniable, Demon's Souls is a Sony game. The same for games like Infamous, Infamous 2, Ratchet/Clank, Resistance, Flower, etc.
 
Take Nintendo's relationship with many of their "2nd party" games, IE Metroid: Other M. I think we can all agree that Other M is a Nintendo game, right? First, they own the IP. And second, Nintendo has taken keen interest in making that a fantastic game full of quality goodness, yes? Yes. It's a Nintendo game in the same way that Demon's Souls is a Sony game. This is where the article is really coming from. And I think it's disingenuous to say "No, that's not a Sony game because it wasn't completely made by a 100% owned subsidiary of Sony!!!"
 
If you disagree that Sony is the only place of innovative games, then by god go about it that way! Don't try to say that Demon's Souls or Infamous aren't Sony games... because you are wrong. I personally think each of the big 3 have highly innovative, unique experiences. I also think this article is very one sided. The only thing I 100% find myself agreeing with the author is when he says Sony is THE leader in technical graphics. This is pretty much factual so far. But I guess we'll have to see how titles like Rage and Brink turn out.

Not often I say this to you but, EXCELLENT post!



                                                                                                             

"I think most would argue that Nintendo is the leader.  Whatever the case Nintendo is pulling in cash hand over fist."

I don't know what "the leader" is supposed to mean. I understand it to mean "the leader in game quality", in which case Sony is indeed "the leader".



Around the Network
dahuman said:

This is a horrible articles written by someboyd ill informed about the gaming industry. Not to mention PS3 does not lead the technology in anyway or form, we should be praising the devs who  can code around it, not Sony. I have not seen a game better than SMG2 this gen yet on PS3 even though I have a plat trophy from UC2, lead the way my ass.


I can name many great games.



Lynx said:

I think most would argue that Nintendo is the leader.  Whatever the case Nintendo is pulling in cash hand over fist.


Sales =/= quality



dahuman said:
Hynad said:

Answer this. What makes Galaxy 2 so much better than the first game?


Galaxy 2 worked on a core game design that made the game already very good and built on top of it, adding different power ups, a mount, tools for the mount, genius level design that easily outranks the 1st with those new and different power ups in mind, a world hub that is nowhere near as confusing as the original, and starts to kick your ass in the first world and still manages to hold your hand with something like super guide if you are a new gamer which is good for both serious gamers and new comers. A musical score that's even beyond the first Galaxy. Also a girlfriend mode that no longer screws you over. I still don't know how Nintendo does it, the level design they come up with are just so out there beyond the reach of other devs, it's fucking crazy. For example, look at something like Crackdown 2, then look at Galaxy 2, you just can't help but wonder sometimes. We definitely need more devs like EAD Tokyo or ND, that's for sure.

There.  That is exactly what I wanted to read.

Basically, they took everything that worked wonders in the first game, and polished everything further.  Adding a few surprises along the way.

My question wasn't to put the greatness of Mario Galaxy 2 into doubt, that would be ridiculous.  It was to make it obvious that Mario Galaxy 2 (or the first one, for that matter) didn't need to reinvent a genre to be concidered as great as it is. 

It didn't reinvent the genre. And I don't think the first game did either.  But Nintendo polished it to some heigths never yet reached for a platformer.

Uncharted 2 did the exact same with the action adventure genre.  It may or not be your cup of tea.  But it's rather difficult to question the amount of polish in Uncharted 2.  Be it the controls, the visuals, the soundtrack, the story, the set-pieces, or just the overall gameplay.

The same goes for God of War 3.  It didn't reinvent the genre.  It polished it to higher heights, while still being a God of War game.  (The game does put you into incredibly epic situations every now and then.  And it's certainly the only game that made me go "WTF FREAKING AWESOME I NEED TO CATCH MY BREATH"-ish out loud, after only 20 minutes of gameplay.

I've stated earlier in this thread that for me, my opinion, my view on things, Sony has this generation reached a level of polish in their games that only Nintendo had before them.

Nintendo's games have wowed me again and again.  Even if I don't necessarily love all of their games (even in the series I love the most like Zelda and Metroid) they still offer an incredible level of polish in all of those.

This gen's Sony games are doing the same for me.



  • PSN: Hynad
  • NN: 3519-6016-4122
  • XBL: Hynad
  • Steam: Hynad81

" I have not seen a game better than SMG2 this gen yet on PS3"

Demon's Souls.



Qays said:

" I have not seen a game better than SMG2 this gen yet on PS3"

Demon's Souls.


I love Demon's Souls just as much as the next guy but no, I mean not only my own opinion versus yours but just about every arbitrary way to judge quality leans in SMG2's favor.

Reviewers = SMG2 > Demons Souls

Sales = SMG2 > Demons Souls

Gamer reception = SMG2 > Demons Souls 

So really the mass consensus is SMG2 > Demons Souls, and it boils down to your opinion vs his which isn't going to definitively prove him wrong or you right  



MaxwellGT2000 - "Does the amount of times you beat it count towards how hardcore you are?"

Wii Friend Code - 5882 9717 7391 0918 (PM me if you add me), PSN - MaxwellGT2000, XBL - BlkKniteCecil, MaxwellGT2000